Active Low-Carber Forums - Hunger overrides sense of fullness after weight loss

Active Low-Carber Forums (http://forum.lowcarber.org/index.php)

- LC Research/Media (http://forum.lowcarber.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - Hunger overrides sense of fullness after weight loss (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=479050)

Hunger overrides sense of fullness after weight loss

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releas...80201123318.htm

Quote:

The levels of hormones that control hunger and fullness(satiety) both rise after weight loss, but individuals may only experience an increase in hunger, according to a new study. The study is published ahead of print in the American Journal of Physiology -- Endocrinology and Metabolism.

A team of researchers studied adult volunteers with severe obesity (body mass index greater than 40) who participated in a comprehensive weight loss program. The volunteers attended five sessions at a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program over the course of two years. During each three-week residential session, participants learned about interventions to aid weight loss, including eating a balanced, calorie-restricted diet, physical activity, talk therapy and nutrition education. Between program visits, participants were encouraged to continue with daily exercise and a healthy diet at home. The research team measured hunger and satiety hormone levels in the blood after the first four weeks of the trial and again after one and two years of continued weight loss. Investigators also recorded the participants' self-reported feelings of hunger and fullness at each of these intervals.

After one month of following the program, the volunteers' subjective sense of fullness after a meal was unchanged, but decreased at the one- and two-year marks, whereas self-reported hunger increased significantly after one and two years. The research team found increases in the levels of both the hunger and satiety hormones after one and two years of sustained weight loss. However, the boost in hunger hormones seemed to override the increase in satiety hormones, explained the researchers.

"This information is of importance for patients and health professionals working with this patient group, and strategies should be identified that can help patients deal with increased hunger in the long term," the researchers wrote.

The hormone I see referred to most often as a "hunger" hormone is ghrelin, I think you could also look at that as sort of a "switch from fed to fasted state" hormone, although that's a bit clunky.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11834429

Quote:

Ghrelin drives GH secretion during fasting in man.
Muller AF1, Lamberts SW, Janssen JA, Hofland LJ, Koetsveld PV, Bidlingmaier M, Strasburger CJ, Ghigo E, Van der Lely AJ.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
In humans, fasting leads to elevated serum GH concentrations. Traditionally, changes in hypothalamic GH-releasing hormone and somatostatin release are considered as the main mechanisms that induce this elevated GH secretion during fasting. Ghrelin is an endogenous ligand of the GH secretagogue receptor and is synthesized in the stomach. As ghrelin administration in man stimulates GH release, while serum ghrelin concentrations are elevated during fasting in man, this increase in ghrelin levels might be another mechanism whereby fasting results in stimulation of GH release.

DESIGN AND SUBJECTS:
In ten healthy non-obese males we performed a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover study comparing fasting with and fasting without GH receptor blockade. GH, ghrelin, insulin, glucose and free fatty acids were assessed.

RESULTS:
While ghrelin levels do not vary considerably in the fed state, fasting rapidly induced a diurnal rhythm in ghrelin concentrations. These changes in serum ghrelin concentrations during fasting were followed by similar, profound changes in serum GH levels. The rapid development of a diurnal ghrelin rhythm could not be explained by changes in insulin, glucose, or free fatty acid levels. Compared with fasting without pegvisomant, fasting with pegvisomant did not change the ghrelin rhythm.

CONCLUSIONS:
These data indicate that ghrelin is the main driving force behind the enhanced GH secretion during fasting.

Ghrelin deficient mice become hypoglycemic when fasted, that enhanced growth hormone is needed to avoid this.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4313585/

Quote:

Although the hunger-reducing effect of a ketogenic diet is well-documented, its main mechanisms of action are still elusive. The global picture is complicated by the contradictory role of ketosis on anorexigenic and orexigenic signals (summarized in Figure Figure4).4). Ketones (mainly BHB) can act both orexigenically or anorexigenically. In the orexigenic mechanism, it increases the circulating level of adiponectin, increasing brain GABA and AMPK phosphorylation and decreasing brain ROS production. The anorexigenic mechanism triggers a main normal glucose meal response, increasing circulating post-meal FFA (thus reducing cerebral NPY), maintaining CCK meal response and decreasing circulating ghrelin.

And since a ketogenic diet is closer to the fasted state, so a switch from fed to fasted is sort of less dramatic, and ketones themselves protect against hypoglycemia, a decrease in a circulating "fasted to fed" or "preventive of hypoglycemia" or even "hunger" hormone if you insist makes sense. Or maybe that's just cramming things into my personal bias. :lol:

Several ghrelin analogs are used to stimulate GH secretion. A common reported effect is increased hunger. This makes a certain sense for a couple reasons. If there's no food coming in, growth prevents tissue loss. And if there's no food coming in, hunger drives one to go hunt for food.

The thing about increased hunger in spite of same ghrelin level following weight loss with a calorie-restricted diet, that's not actually new. We got the Minnesota semi-starvation experiment, where subjects just scarfed down everything they could once the experiment ended. They gained what they'd lost, and then some extra fat tissue. What is new is that the hormone that regulates hunger stays the same, yet hunger is greater. I'm leaning toward a greater sensitivity to ghrelin, maybe due to feedback derived from the neurosis triggered by the calorie restriction. Or, if we also invoke leptin (likely the satiety hormone they mention), then I lean toward a greater resistance to leptin, which should otherwise suppress ghrelin, maybe also a result of some feedback from the neurosis etc. Or, if we also invoke dopamine, we could imagine the calorie restriction had become a learned behavior, where there's little dopamine being released cuz there's little food to trigger this release, which in turn results in a sort of greater demand for dopamine once calorie restriction ends, and this greater demand just can't be filled cuz the new learned behavior (learned during calorie restriction) overwrote the old one of adequate food intake, maybe also a result of the neurosis.

About neurosis. I think it's a sort of trauma. Things learned during trauma stick. It's very hard to get rid of loop thoughts developed during trauma. I imagine the constant thinking about food must have stuck with these subjects, long after the experiment ended. The loop thought here would have been something like "hungry, can't eat, experiment, hungry, can't eat, experiment, etc", on and on every second, day and night for the length of the experiment. It's a very short loop, easily learned at first and easily remembered. Once the experiment ended, the "can't eat" and "experiment" parts of the loop disappeared, but the "hungry" part obviously stayed because it's a natural part of our thoughts, it just became more prominent due to the neurosis resulting from the initial loop during the experiment. The trauma of neurosis amplified the otherwise benign hunger, maybe in both amplitude and frequency, but probably mostly frequency.

I wonder if they asked how often they felt hungry before and after calorie restriction?

On the other hand I only need to think of the two monkeys in a cage. The one who gets his hit only once in a while, he pushes the button all the time. This means that for caloric restriction, if it was possible to push the button all the time, we would. In effect, the effect of caloric restriction observed post-experiment is immediate rather than just post-experiment. This means they should look more closely at the effects during calorie restriction. Who knows, maybe they'll find that experiment somehow unethical. But then again, they haven't deemed it unethical yet and they did find a detrimental effect post-experiment.

Hunger overrides sense of fullness after weight loss

I don't know about the hormones, but this has been my experience. I recently started the 5:2, where I eat normally for 5 days and 500 calories for 2 days. I should note that eating normally for me means 1400 ~ 1500 calories and low carb. The 1500 calorie days seem harder than the 500 calorie days. I guess the calorie restriction is causing hunger to carry over even on days when I eat what should be satisfying. I don't remember experiencing that before, but then I have never really tried calorie restriction.

Interesting. I did 5:2 for 4 months with no calorie restrictions - well, I ate zero cals on the fast days and what I wanted on the feed days. I experienced little hunger on the day after the Fast much to my surprise, not interested in an early breakfast for example. Now I am adapted to daily time restricted eating I am not really hungry until around 21 hours into the Fast and usually continue to 22 without suffering.

There's a difference between calorie restriction and fasting. After a time, hunger disappears during fasting. This also makes sense from the point of view of survival. If we're neurotic, it's hard to focus on hunting for food, which could be somewhat a complex task.

There's also an important aspect of calorie restriction - disruption of those hormones. I imagine the cause of this disruption is what we eat, because it doesn't happen with a fast where we eat nothing.

The point is if there's disruption because of what we eat, and this disruption is more obvious merely because we don't eat enough, then there's still disruption when we do eat enough of whatever we do eat. So when we eat nothing, we remove the disruptor. We still don't know what the disruptor is, but at least we know there is one. A process of elimination should help us find it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by M Levac

About neurosis. I think it's a sort of trauma. Things learned during trauma stick. It's very hard to get rid of loop thoughts developed during trauma. I imagine the constant thinking about food must have stuck with these subjects, long after the experiment ended. The loop thought here would have been something like "hungry, can't eat, experiment, hungry, can't eat, experiment, etc", on and on every second, day and night for the length of the experiment. It's a very short loop, easily learned at first and easily remembered. Once the experiment ended, the "can't eat" and "experiment" parts of the loop disappeared, but the "hungry" part obviously stayed because it's a natural part of our thoughts, it just became more prominent due to the neurosis resulting from the initial loop during the experiment. The trauma of neurosis amplified the otherwise benign hunger, maybe in both amplitude and frequency, but probably mostly frequency.

Gosh yes. Those same neurons getting activated over and over and over. Having handled both the mental and physical sides of the stress eating issue, I can say that even though this all happened in my teens and early adulthood, decades ago now, I STILL have that at last the house to myself and the only way to celebrate it is to stuff myself with food which will active my dopamine receptors is with me yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambulo

I had been doing 16/8 time restricted for a few months and didn't see any change in weight. While I am not really in weight loss mode, I am interested in losing another 5 to see how that feels. Not sure if I'll keep doing the 5:2, but maybe I need to give it more time or switch to a true fast. Of course the other option is to just maintain.

There is also the PSMF 'diet' that's calorie restricted, but relatively protein rich. Don't do it exactly now, but find I can go quite a long time comfortably on a mid-morning snack: canned tuna salad, sardines, beef jerky or some almonds and cheese.

This keeps my activity level up where it should be and fasting blood sugar down till I have an earlyish supper. It's tough to lose the last 10 pounds in any case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by M Levac

There's a difference between calorie restriction and fasting. After a time, hunger disappears during fasting. This also makes sense from the point of view of survival. If we're neurotic, it's hard to focus on hunting for food, which could be somewhat a complex task.

There's also an important aspect of calorie restriction - disruption of those hormones. I imagine the cause of this disruption is what we eat, because it doesn't happen with a fast where we eat nothing.

The point is if there's disruption because of what we eat, and this disruption is more obvious merely because we don't eat enough, then there's still disruption when we do eat enough of whatever we do eat. So when we eat nothing, we remove the disruptor. We still don't know what the disruptor is, but at least we know there is one. A process of elimination should help us find it.

Thanks for bringing this up - I was going to mention it, because a friend whose mother grew up during the Great Depression, and her family was so poor that they often had no food at all for several days always told my friend that not having anything to eat wasn't so bad after the first couple of days.

I'm not suggesting anyone fast that long of course.

I've seen entirely too many people go on extreme calorie restricted diets - 500-800 cals, and it always ends up the same - they can white knuckle their way through it for a few weeks, and if they only needed to lose 10-15 lbs, maybe even stick to it long enough to lose the weight they wanted to lose, but as soon as they go off the diet, they go crazy eating all the things they fantasized about while dieting... and of course end up regaining the weight in record time. I never thought of it as a neurosis, but that's essentially what it is, because while dieting their thoughts are consumed with all the foods they wish they could have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calianna

While dieting their thoughts are consumed with all the foods they wish they could have.

Yeah, and that's no way to live.

We can have delicious, nutritious whole foods in reasonable quantities while being mostly free from hunger and cravings as we eat to live, not live to eat.